z31maniac said:
Would you guys explain why radial mount brakes and inverted forks are better than say how its done on the '04. I missed the memo.
Ahem, brakes:
With conventional calipers, the interface between the caliper and the fork leg forms a plane perpendicular to the axle. Braking force will cause slippage until the mounting bolts physically limit the movement of the caliper.
With radial mount calipers, the mating surfaces (theoretically) form 2 planes that intersect concurrent to the centerline of the axle. This causes all braking force to act directly on fork leg without generating any shear forces at the interface.
Overall, the braking is smoother.
Forks:
The inverted (upside/down) fork is a more rigid construction owing to the following factors: The sliding and fixed tubes have more (longer) overlap than in a conventional fork. The tube diameter is larger at the point of highest stress, namely the lower fork bridge, similarly, the connection to the bridges are more rigid simply because they are larger.
The disadvantages are:
Its unsprung weight is higher than on a conventional fork. This is because the unsprung part is steel as opposed to alloy/aluminium, also, extra brake fittings must be added to the unsprung parts to support the brake calipers, this function is provided by the fork tubes on a conventional fork.
Overall, unless you are a pro, you will not know the difference...but it does look trick!